1835 Senator
Evans: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for the
Environment and Heritage—With reference to the ex-Defence lands managed
by the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust:

(1) Were there any valuations done on any of the sites prior to the
transfer from the Department of Defence to the Sydney Harbour Federation
Trust.

(2) What was the valuation for each of the sites managed by the Trust.

(3) (a) Who undertook these valuations; and (b) when were they undertaken.

(4) What is the estimated current valuation for each of the sites being
managed by the Trust.

(5) (a) Was there any valuation of the cost of the remediation works
that were required at each of the ex-Defence sites being managed by
the Trust; and (b) what was the amount of these valuations.

(6) For each financial year to date: How much has been spent on remediation
and environmental works at each of the ex-Defence sites now managed
by the Trust.

(7) When is it expected that all remediation work at the ex-Defence
sites will be completed.

(8) What is the process by which the ex-Defence sites will be transferred
to the State of New South Wales following completion of remediation
works at these sites.

(9) (a) Will the sites then become part of the Sydney Harbour National
Park, under the management of the New South Wales Government; and (b)
when is it expected that this will occur.

1836 Senator
Evans: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for the
Environment and Heritage—

(1) How much funding has the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust received
from the Commonwealth Government in each financial year since its establishment.

(2) Does this include the initial funding of $96 million that the Trust
received as part of the Federation Fund.

(3) Can a breakdown be provided of how this funding has been spent
for each financial year since the Trust was established.

(4) Can a breakdown be provided of how the $96 million allocated to
the Trust as part of the Federation Fund was spent.

(5) Can a breakdown be provided of every payment greater than $1 million
made by the Trust since it establishment.

(6) (a) When is it expected that the work of the Trust will be completed;
and (b) will the Trust be closed down once its work is completed.

(7) What are the forecasts for Commonwealth funding to the Trust for
the next 4 financial years.

(8) Has the New South Wales Government made any financial contributions
to the Trust at any time since its establishment; if so, can a list
be proved of these contributions (i.e. date, amount, purpose etc.).

(9) Is it expected that the New South Wales Government will make any
financial contributions to the Trust at any time over the next 4 years.

(10) When the remediation work being undertaken at the ex-Defence sites
managed by the Trust is fully completed, and the lands are transferred
to the State of New South Wales, will the New South Wales Government
have to pay any money to the Commonwealth in respect of the transfer;
if not, why not.

1838 Senator
Evans: To ask the Minister for Defence—With reference to the
Defence Security Authority and the security clearance process prior
to the department doing business with individuals and organisations:

(1) Are individuals and organisations with which the department does
business required to obtain a security clearance.

(2) What is the process for obtaining these clearances, for example,
when can the individual or organisation apply, what does it cost, who
bears the cost etc.

(3) How long does it take for security clearance applications submitted
by individuals or organisations to be processed.

(4) What is current backlog of security clearance applications submitted
by individuals or organisations seeking to do business with the department.

(5) (a) Why has this backlog developed; and (b) when is it expected
that the backlog will be cleared.

(6) Are there any appeal or dispute resolution procedures for individuals
or organisations who do not receive a security clearance which would
enable them to do business with the department; if so, can an outline
be provided of the nature of any appeal or dispute resolution procedures;
if not, why not.

1840 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—

(1) Did Dr Peter Ellyard visit the Wide Bay Burnett region of Queensland
in August 2002 in connection with the Sustainable Regions Programme.

(2) Was the visit the result of the collaboration of the department
and the Wide Bay Burnett Sustainable Region Advisory Committee.

(3) What was the cost to the Commonwealth of Dr Ellyard’s visit to
the Wide Bay Burnett region and can this cost be itemised.

(4) (a) What was the purpose of the visit; and (b) can a copy of the
itinerary be provided.

(5) Did the visit include a public presentation at the Kondari Resort,
Urangan, on 8 August 2002; if so: (a) how was the presentation advertised;
and (b) how many citizens of the Wide Bay Burnett region (other than
members of the committee) attended.

(6) On what basis was this visit considered a necessary part of the
committee’s consideration of funding priorities for the region.

(7) Has Dr Ellyard attended meetings in other regions in connection
with the Sustainable Regions Programme; if so: (a) what regions has
Dr Ellyard visited at the invitation of the department and/or Sustainable
Region Advisory committees; and (b) on what dates were those visits.

1841 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—What sitting fees, travelling allowances
and motor vehicle allowances have been paid to each member of the Wide
Bay Burnett Sustainable Regions Advisory Committee since its establishment
in April 2002.

1842 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to Sustainable Regions
Programme funding for the Wide Bay Burnett region of Queensland:

(1) Why is the Yarraman district included in the Wide Bay Burnett region
for the purposes of the Sustainable Regions Programme but was not included
in the same region for the purposes of the Wide Bay Burnett Structural
Adjustment Package.

(2) (a) On what date did the Wide Bay Burnett Sustainable Region Advisory
Committee call for expressions of interest from possible candidates
for Sustainable Regions Programme funding; and (b) in what form was
that call made.

(3) How many expressions of interest were received.

(4) On what date did the committee report registration statistics to
the department.

(5) Has the committee: (a) discussed the expressions of interest with
each prospective proponent; (b) assessed all expressions of interest
against program guidelines; (c) identified eligible projects; (d) worked
with prospective proponents of eligible projects on the development
of formal funding applications; and (e) made a recommendation to the
Minister on funding individual projects; if so, what was the date of
the recommendation.

(6) With reference to the 29 November 2002 media statement by the Member
for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) titled., ‘Strong Interest in Regional Funding’:
(a) on what date was the contents of each expression of interest communicated
to the Member; (b) did the committee or the department inform the Member
about the contents of each expression of interest; (c) was the Minister
or his office consulted about this communication; and (d) was the statement
by the Member that projects being considered by the committee ‘all
appeared to have potential for moving the region towards self-reliance’
based on advice from the committee or the department.

(7) Has the committee received representations from the Member for
Wide Bay on behalf of prospective proponents or the committee.

1843 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to Regional Solutions
Programme funding for the 2002-03 financial year for projects that provide
assistance to people living in the federal electorate of Wide Bay, for
each project:

(1) What is the name of the project.

(2) What is the name of the proponent.

(3) What is the business address of the proponent.

(4) What amount of funding has been allocated to the project.

(5) On what date was the funding allocation announced.

(6) What is the nature of the project.

(7) What amount of funding has the proponent received and on what dates.

1844 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $100 000
to the Tiaro Shire Council in the 2000-01 financial year under the Regional
Solutions Programme, for an economic development and tourism project:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1845 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $20 000
to the Monto Shire Council in the 2000-01 financial year under the Regional
Solutions Programme, to employ a project development officer:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1846 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $90 273
to the Hervey Bay City Musicians Inc. in the 2001-02 financial year under
the Regional Solutions Programme, for music rehearsal rooms:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1847 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $12 200
to the Burnett Inland Economic Development Organisation in the 2001-02
financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, for the implementation
of a regional development strategy:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1848 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $5 000
to the Hervey Bay Historical Railway Village in the 2001-02 financial
year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to fund a consultant to
assist the village:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1849 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $63 635
to the Gin Gin and District Alliance Inc. in the 2001-02 financial year
under the Regional Solutions Programme, to employ a co-ordinator to conduct
training programs:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1850 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $116 500
to the Maryborough and Hervey Bay Show Society Limited in the 2001-02
financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to upgrade showground
infrastructure:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1851 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $178 000
to the Theodore Sport & Recreation Association Inc. in the 2001-02
financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to provide sport
and recreation facilities:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1852 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $100 000
to the Eidsvold Shire Council in the 2001-02 financial year under the
Regional Solutions Programme, to add value to native hardwood timbers:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1853 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $272 727
to the Banana Shire Community Resource Centre Reference Group in the
2001-02 financial year under the Regional Solutions Programme, for a
community resource centre:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.

1854 Senator
O’Brien: To ask the Minister representing the Minister for
Transport and Regional Services—With reference to the grant of $29 263
to the Monduran Anglers and Stocking Association in the 2001-02 financial
year under the Regional Solutions Programme, to develop skills in regional
youth:

(1) (a) What total Regional Solutions Programme funds have been paid
to the proponent; and (b) if the funds were paid in one sum, on what
date was the payment made; or if the funds were paid in instalments,
what were the instalment dates and amounts paid on each date.

(2) Can a detailed description of the project be provided.

(3) Did the department or the Minister receive representations from
the Member for Wide Bay (Mr Truss) on behalf of the proponent.

(4) When did the department or the Minister inform the proponent and
the Member for Wide Bay about the funding approval.

(5) When did the department or the Minister publicly announce the grant.

(6) In relation to the application for funding:

(a) when
was the funding application lodged with the department;

(b) when
was the application approved by the Minister;

(c) did
the funding application comply with the Regional Solutions Programme
guidelines; if not, can details of the non-compliance be provided;

(d) if
applicable, when was the application varied;

(e) what
Regional Solutions Programme funding was sought by the proponent, including
goods and services tax (if applicable);

(f) what
is the business address of the proponent;

(g) is
the proponent a sponsoring organisation administering the grant on behalf
of another organisation; if so, can details be provided of this organisation
including its name, business address and main activity;

(h) what
project funding category did the proponent nominate: (i) planning, (ii)
project implementation, (iii) community infrastructure, or (iv) resourcing
a person to work for the community; if the answer was (iv), did the
proponent propose to create a new position; if not, how had the position
been funded until the time of application;

(i) what
particular issue or issues in the local community did the proponent
say would be addressed by the project;

(j) what
expected project benefits did the proponent nominate;

(k) how
did the proponent advise that the outcomes of the project would be sustained;

(l) did
the proponent advise that the project would be self-sustaining; if so,
how;

(m) did
the project arise from an earlier community planning process; if so,
how was the planning conducted and what issues and outcomes were identified;

(n) did
evidence of community support accompany the application or was evidence
otherwise provided to the department; if so, what evidence was provided;

(o) what
community involvement in project committees or working groups existed
or were proposed by the proponent at the time of application;

(p) what
experience in developing, budgeting and reporting on projects of this
type did the proponent possess at the time of application;

(q) did
the proponent propose to purchase consultancy services; if so, did the
proponent provide quotes with the application;

(r) if
the proposal involved community infrastructure, did the proponent provide
a feasibility study and/or business plan;

(s) did
the proponent approach other Commonwealth or state funding sources for
the project or components of the project within 2 years of the date of
application; if so, what sources were approached and what funding was
received;

(t) what
other financial and non-financial contributions to the project were
nominated by the proponent and can a breakdown of these proposed contributions
be provided including a calculation of the dollar value of the in-kind
contributions; and

(u) what
major project milestones were nominated by the proponent, including
the commencement and completion dates.

(7) In relation to the progress of the project:

(a) what
benefits has the project realised;

(b) what
involvement does the community have in project committees or working
groups;

(c) has
the proponent purchased consultancy services with Regional Solutions
Programme funding; if so, how much has been spent on consultants;

(d) what
financial and non-financial contributions to the project has the project
received from other sources;

(e) have
all project milestones nominated by the proponent in the funding application
been met; if not, why not; and

(f) (i)
what monitoring and evaluation process was adopted, and (ii) has the
department undertaken monitoring visits; if so, on what dates.

(8) In relation to completion of the project funding period (if applicable):

(a) when
did the project and/or funding period conclude;

(b) if
the project is ongoing, what is its source of funding i.e. self-funding
or other sources;

(c) has
the proponent properly acquitted the project by submitting a final report;
if so, on what date;

(d) if
applicable, has the final payment to the proponent been made; and

(e) has
an independent evaluation been undertaken; if so: (i) who undertook
the evaluation, (ii) when was it completed, and (iii) what findings
did it make.